I am a little confused about the recent article about the developer suing the Planning Board in the Village of Bloomingburg. The Article 78 the developer issued had information about the right to build, etc. ... but also contained comments from blogs that were deemed to be anti-Semitic and anti-Hasidic. I remember from that meeting when the developer's representative was asked about the need for the private girls' school, the answer was along the lines of the developer wants or believes it's needed; correct me if that is not true. There wasn't any verbal mention that the private girls' school will be Hasidim, so why bring blog posts into this? If the developer is building a Hasidic community, why hasn't it been said?

Daniel Wise

Bloomingburg

So now Ken Hall, in his Jan. 9 column about medical marijuana legalization, is ever-so-gently, ever-so-politely noting that Gov. Cuomo "has done it the old-fashioned way, one of three men running New York from that room in Albany." Hall asked rhetorically, "I wonder if we should really bother to say anything at all (about the marijuana issue), if anybody is going to ask our opinion ..." He ends the column by meekly suggesting, "there's a much larger issue here, one that would benefit from real debate and discussion."

Now that it's an issue dear to him, Hall is scratching at Cuomo's door, asking if we could please talk about this.

Sorry, Ken. After the way our governor rammed his gun control law through, using a Message of Necessity when no emergency existed and putting an ineffective law in place by illegal means that will now take a decade to undo, who could blame him for using a proven method over and over again?